Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14816 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-773 Year-2023 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Geeta Devi Wife Of Murari Prasad Resident Of Mohalla -HANUMAN Nagar, Saketpuri Road No 3, Police Station- Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna 2.

Neha Kumari Wife Of Jitendra Prasad Resident Of Mohalla -HANUMAN Nagar, Saketpuri Road No 3, Police Station- Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Atul Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are women and persons with clean antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant based on general and omnibus allegations. It is further submitted that the wife of the informant was killed and thus based on surmises and conjecture, alleges that the accused persons including the petitioners were involved in the occurrence. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14816 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/3 further submitted that the informant in the FIR has alleged that his wife was a health worker associated with P.H.C Pandarak and the accused persons were extorting lakhs of money from her and had threatened that in the event if money is not given then she would be killed.

4.

The learned counsel further submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that a woman, who worked as a health worker attached with a PHC, would have given lakhs of money in extortion to the accused persons. It is further submitted that the husband of the petitioner No. 1, Murari Prasad, had given some amount to the deceased for purchasing land and the said amount was siphoned off and sale deed was also not executed, as such, Murari Prasad was asking the deceased to return back his money. It is next submitted that thereafter the occurrence took place and the informant took the same as an opportunity to implicate the entire family members based on suspicion, when informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14816 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 3/3 event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 773 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T